| From: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Issues with Quorum Commit |
| Date: | 2010-10-11 11:47:30 |
| Message-ID: | 4CB2F952.8050908@bluegap.ch |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg,
to me it looks like we have very similar goals, but start from different
preconditions. I absolutely agree with you given the preconditions you
named.
On 10/08/2010 10:04 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> How is that a new problem? It's already possible to end up with a
> standby pair that has suffered through some bizarre failure chain such
> that it's not necessarily obvious which of the two systems has the most
> recent set of data on it. And that's not this project's problem to
> solve.
Thanks for pointing that out. I think that might not have been clear to
me. This limitation of scope certainly make sense for the Postgres
project in general.
Regards
Markus Wanner
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Leonardo Francalanci | 2010-10-11 13:20:29 | On the usefulness of hint bits |
| Previous Message | Devrim GÜNDÜZ | 2010-10-11 11:22:17 | Re: pgxs docdir question |